Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 159 posts

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#81

Post by walrus01 »

dontlaugh wrote: post #15
Retric wrote: post #10

At least for the US why not keep one or more nuclear missile subs in the Great Lakes? Lake Superior alone covers 31,700 square miles to an average depth of 483 feet. It’s far to large an area to target with a first strike and well protected from non US/Canadian forces. Edit: A US/Canadian treaty demilitarized the Great Lakes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush–Bagot_Treaty

The US uses submarines to threaten attacks on far away countries, not for defence.

MAD is a form of defence at the level of nation states with ballistic missiles that can reach anywhere else on earth.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#82

Post by Terry_Roll »

Human robots and robot training (aka military, police, medical, fire) are still the states best assets for controlling the already present threat to the countries borders ie the population, as well as foreign countries and their array of human robots. However drones like those mentioned in this article, do not suffer from human problems like the Chinese Whispers/Telephone/transmission chain experiments in the same way humans do, they can also lie dormant outside the normal confines of a sustainable human environment, ie food, shelter, sewage, etc. If nuclear powered drone's dont exist here before 2050 or even today, I'd be very surprised considering the obviious nuclear powered subs, how the placement of land based nuclear power stations are predominantly on the edge of water bodies, like lakes and sea's. The out of sight out of mind attitude with decisions makers, as seen with sewage outlets into rivers and sea's is another example of their thinking. Air based nuclear powered drones are not out of sight or mind, excluding the nuclear powered satellites which will burn up on entry, dissipating their nuclear radiation over a wider area, hopefully not triggering any of the radiation sensors placed around various countries.

But pattern recognition is an AI's best friend, I wonder if NOAA's NDBC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Data_Buoy_Center) have detected anomalies over the long term when considering these are drone's in all but name, powering sites like https://magicseaweed.com/

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#83

Post by onion2k »

bombcar wrote: post #38
Retric wrote: post #10

At least for the US why not keep one or more nuclear missile subs in the Great Lakes? Lake Superior alone covers 31,700 square miles to an average depth of 483 feet. It’s far to large an area to target with a first strike and well protected from non US/Canadian forces. Edit: A US/Canadian treaty demilitarized the Great Lakes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush–Bagot_Treaty

It is/was simpler and cheaper to just stick nukes in big holes in the ground all over the midwest. Some are probably still "hot".

Those will be among the targets in the first strike. Unless they can fire before the nukes hit they're not useful. Subs are pretty much the only option.

I suspect foreign agents try to bribe people in submarine crews to sabotage their sub in the event of a strike. If someone onboard could stop the American second strike missiles being fired they'd give Russia a huge advantage. I imagine the Navy have considerer this.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#84

Post by lostlogin »

lb1lf wrote: post #77
jakzurr wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We could use that as a defense against Canada. ;)

You may be joking, but do keep in mind that the Canadians (well, the British, but if memory serves, a significant fraction of the force were from Canada) sacked Washington D.C. in 1814.

If anyone is going to sack D.C. in the near future, it would seem most likely to be Americans.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#85

Post by trashtester »

dylan604 wrote: post #65
trashtester wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those would be Virginia class attacks subs, not ballistic missile subs, I think. An Ohio class could be added temporarily, though, to add even more cruise missile capability to the task force. (Since they, or at least some of them, are now dual purpose platforms.)

And how many of those Ohio class subs actually carry missles and have not been filled with cement ballast?

I expect such things to be confidential....

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#86

Post by [deleted] »

bombcar wrote: post #38
Retric wrote: post #10

At least for the US why not keep one or more nuclear missile subs in the Great Lakes? Lake Superior alone covers 31,700 square miles to an average depth of 483 feet. It’s far to large an area to target with a first strike and well protected from non US/Canadian forces. Edit: A US/Canadian treaty demilitarized the Great Lakes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush–Bagot_Treaty

It is/was simpler and cheaper to just stick nukes in big holes in the ground all over the midwest. Some are probably still "hot".

[deleted]

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#87

Post by ithkuil »

pyuser583 wrote: post #66
sgc wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However, it would leave them is a small, well-known area and would allow for easier signature profiling via sensors mounted on any number of craft, that could then be used on other subs of the same class elsewhere in the world. That was the reason why when some idiot in the White House revealed where our subs were near China and HK, it was a big deal.

Some idiot in the White House? Link?

Random link https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles-subma...

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#90

Post by koterpillar »

sitkack wrote: post #71
ceejayoz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shortening the time to target is one of the benefits (well, is that really the right term here?) of submarines, yes, but another is survivability for a retaliatory strike as a deterrent. Trident missiles have at least a 7,500 mile range. A couple in the Great Lakes would provide that with complete safety against Russian hunter-killer subs.

Russian subs are already in the Great Lakes.

https://xkcd.com/405/
Post reply on HN